{"id":25546,"date":"2022-04-08T13:51:43","date_gmt":"2022-04-08T17:51:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=25546"},"modified":"2022-04-08T13:51:45","modified_gmt":"2022-04-08T17:51:45","slug":"states-act-response-to-end-title-42-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2022\/04\/08\/states-act-response-to-end-title-42-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"As Biden Stands Down at the Border, Can States Step Up?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Bracing for an even bigger stampede of illegal aliens when the Biden administration halts Title 42<\/a> expulsions, two beleaguered border states are exploring legal steps to stop what is already seen as an \u201cinvasion.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe violence and lawlessness at the border caused by transnational cartels and gangs satisfies the definition of an \u2018invasion\u2019 under the U.S. Constitution, and Arizona therefore has the power to defend itself from this invasion under the governor\u2019s authority as Commander-in-Chief,\u201d Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich<\/a> declared in February.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now Texas\u2019 attorney general<\/a> is being asked to follow suit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThere are many similarities between the two states and the current border crisis,\u201d said state Rep. Matt Krause, R-Haslet, chairman of the Texas State House Committee on General Investigating. \u201cThe effects of a porous border are felt every day. Texas has the right and responsibility to secure its border.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Title 42 is lifted, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials estimate up to 500,000 illegal aliens<\/a> will cross the border per month \u2013 roughly 18,000 per day.\u00a0That would be an unprecedented 5-6 million in a single year, and Arizona and Texas would bear the brunt of that traffic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Paxton, who is in the midst of a primary re-election fight with Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush, has not responded to Krause\u2019s call to action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Arizona\u2019s Brnovich notes that President James Madison sanctioned Virginia\u2019s use of state militia to stop smugglers as a valid exercise of authority. \u201cThere is every basis to conclude this sovereign power was retained as reflected in the Constitution\u2019s State Self-Defense Clause,\u201d according to Brnovich\u2019s legal opinion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Import-Export Clause in Article I, Section 10 also recognizes that states retain sovereign authority to execute inspection laws, which requires operational control of the border to channel entry of goods to authorized ports of entry,\u201d Brnovich says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, the Invasion Clause in Article IV, Section 4 provides that \u201c[t]he United States \u2026 shall protect each [state in this union]against invasion.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe scenario that justified Virginia to use state military forces to protect its own borders from violent smugglers now confronts Texas on a much larger scale,\u201d says Kinney County (Texas) Attorney Brent Smith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kinney County, population 3,600, has aggressively leveraged Texas law to convict and incarcerate more than 700 criminal aliens in the past six months. Local and state charges range from criminal trespass to auto theft to human smuggling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even so, Smith says residents \u201ccontinue to sustain vast amounts of property damage and are threatened with imminent harm.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such dangers are endemic across South Texas, yet other border counties have done little or nothing. Prosecutors are not prosecuting; state facilities designated to house criminal aliens remain at less than half capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By failing to declare a border emergency, frontline counties are foregoing law-enforcement resources available through Gov. Greg Abbott\u2019s Operation Lone Star<\/a>. So it appears that Texas has work to do on its end while the Biden administration opens the floodgates and dismantles \u201cpublic charge\u201d<\/a> laws, clearing the way for migrants to partake of a smorgasbord of benefits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With a clear and present danger to public safety, along with the daunting downstream costs of providing services to ever more illegal aliens, states are up against a wall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Biden administration has essentially redefined \u2018border security\u2019 to mean more orderly admission and processing of illegal aliens regardless of how many migrants show up at our border, observes RJ Hauman of FAIR. \u201cFor all intents and purposes, they might as well change the name of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to U.S. Customs and Border Processing,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recognizing dereliction of duty when they see it, Arizona, Louisiana and Missouri sued<\/a> the Biden administration, seeking to require continued enforcement of Title 42. If that lawsuit fails, Hauman says, \u201cNearly every border crosser will be released into the United States \u2013 a message that will be heard loud and clear not just in Central America, but around the world. It is an unprecedented invitation to chaos at the border.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether states can take immigration enforcement into their hands remains an open question. When Arizona passed laws to assert control over its border with Mexico in 2010 those statutes were smacked down<\/a> by federal judges. But the dispute was never argued at the U.S. Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Was James Madison correct? Do states have a constitutional right and responsibility to defend themselves when the federal government will not? Or can Joe Biden simply stand down and facilitate an unprecedented invasion of this country? It\u2019s time to decide.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bracing for an even bigger stampede of illegal aliens when the Biden administration halts Title 42 expulsions, two beleaguered border states are exploring legal steps to stop what is already seen as an \u201cinvasion.\u201d \u201cThe violence and lawlessness at the border caused by transnational cartels and gangs satisfies the definition of an \u2018invasion\u2019 under the<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":17817,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[10412],"tags":[10413,955,222,105],"yst_prominent_words":[2019,4589,2705,5406,10470,2043,2691,5758,2013,2008,3653,11901,2373,1945,2167,10427,1933],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25546"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25546"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25546\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25547,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25546\/revisions\/25547"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17817"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25546"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25546"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25546"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=25546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}